Ballot Question 1: Government Mandated Nurse Staffing at Hospitals All About Money, Jobs and Power

Some signs show “Nurses say Yes On 1.” Other signs show “Nurses say No On 1.” TV ads by Yes proponents say it’s all about patient safety and that 86% of nurses favor it. Proponents of No try to convince us that some small hospitals may close because of the added costs, and wait times to see an emergency room doctor will be longer.

Question 1 on the November 6th ballot would set government-mandated requirements for the maximum number of patients per nurse in various medical units of a hospital. Heavy fines, up to $25,000, would be imposed on hospitals for each violation of these mandates.

The Committee to Ensure Safe Patient Care is the ballot committee running the “Yes On 1” campaign. The latest Office of Campaign and Finance (OCPF) report shows it had raised $9.10 million as of October 1st. Of that amount, $8.97 million or 98.7% was donated by the Massachusetts Nurses Association.

And who are they? The Massachusetts Nurses Association is one of the 82 left-wing, social, labor and religious organizations that make up the coalition of Raise Up Massachusetts. You remember them. We wrote about Raise Up Massachusetts in the July issue of the Boston Broadside.

Raise Up Mass. was one of the leaders and leading fundraisers for the graduated income tax, $15/hour minimum wage and paid family leave ballot questions. The first was thrown out by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the last two were withdrawn after Governor Charlie Baker negotiated a “grand bargain” which gave them almost everything they wanted. Also note that Raise Up Mass. was the key player in getting the Retailers Association of Massachusetts to withdraw its ballot question reducing the sales tax from 6.25% to 5%.

So Raise Up Massachusetts, of which the Massachusetts Nurses Association is a member, is all about redistribution of wealth – taking money from the more productive and giving it to the less productive.

Getting back to Question 1 itself, who also donated to the cause? The Health Professionals & Allied Employees Solidarity Fund kicked in $15 thousand, the Teamsters Local 25 Drive kicked in $10 thousand, the Unite Here Local 26 $10 thousand and the New York State Nurses Association kicked in $25 thousand.

So why would the Teamsters and Unite Here, a hotel and food service union, be interested in a ballot question on patient care? And why would a New York State Nurses Association send money to help Massachusetts patients?

The answer can be gleaned from the following list of organizations which support Question 1:

Health Care Organizations

Health Watch USA

Independence House, Inc.

Mass-Care

Mass Health Professionals for Clean Energy (MHPCE)

Massachusetts Nurses Association

Massachusetts Student Nurses Association

Show Me Your Stethoscope Foundation

Tufts Progressive Alliance

United Nurses & Allied Professionals

Western Mass. Medicare for all

Women’s Health Institute

Nurses Nationwide and Globally

ANNF – Victoria Branch

California Nurses Association

Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions

Canadian Nursing Students’ Association

District of Columbia Nurses Association

Haitian Nurses Association

Illinois Nurses Association

Law Enforcement Officers Security Unions LEOSU, LEOSPBA

Manitoba Nurses’ Union

Michigan Nurses Association

Minnesota Nurses Association

National Nurses United

National Union of Healthcare Workers

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Public and Private Employees (NAPE)

New Brunswick Nurses Union

New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association Australia

New York Professional Nurses Union

New York State Nurses Association

Northeast Nurses Association

Nova Scotia Government and General Employees Union

Nova Scotia Nurses’ Union

Ohio Nurses Association

Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses & Allied Professionals

Philippine Nurses Association of New England

Prince Edward Island Union of Public Sector Employees’

Prince Edward Island Nurses’ Union

Queensland Nurses and Midwives’ Union

Registered Nurses’ Union Newfoundland and Labrador

Saskatchewan Union of Nurses

United Nurses of Alberta

Community Groups

Berkshire Democratic Brigades

Boston Musicians Association

Coalition for Social Justice

Education Enterprises

EPOCA (Ex-Prisoners and Prisoners Organizing for Community Advancement)

Foundation for a Green Future

Franklin County Continuing the Political Revolution

Greater Worcester Humanists

Jobs with Justice

Mass Interfaith Worker Justice

Mass Retirees

Mass Senior Action Council

Massachusetts Voter Table

Massachusetts Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health

Neighbor To Neighbor

New England Jewish Labor Committee

Our Revolution

Our Revolution Massachusetts

Pax Christi Boston

Progressive Democrats of America

Progressive Taunton

Public Higher Education Network of Massachusetts (PHENOM)

Resist the Pipeline

Stop the West Roxbury Lateral Pipeline (SWRL)

Socialist Alternative

The Labor Guild, Archdiocese of Boston

Women’s Institute for Leadership Development

Worcester Interfaith

Worcester Socialist Alternative

Democratic Town Committees

The Massachusetts Democratic Party

Agawam Democratic Town Committee

Amherst Democratic Town Committee

Barre Democratic Town Committee

Brewster Democrats

Braintree Democratic Town Committee

Bridgewater Democratic Town Committee

Chicopee Democratic City Committee

Colrain Democratic Town Committee

Dennis Democratic Town Committee

Easthampton Democratic Town Committee

East Longmeadow Democratic Town Committee

Hopkinton Democratic Town Committee

Huntington Democratic Party

Lunenburg Democratic Town Committee

Merrimack Valley Central Labor Council

North Adams Democratic City Committee

Northampton Democratic City Committee

North Reading Democratic Town Committee

Norwood Democratic Town Committee

Orleans Democratic Town Committee

Princeton Democratic Town Committee

Quincy Democratic City Committee

Randolph Democratic Town Committee

Reading Democratic Town Committee

Rehoboth Democratic Town Committee

Sunderland Town Democratic Committee

Shrewsbury Democratic Town Committee

South Hadley Democratic Town Committee

Sturbridge Democratic Town Committee

Truo Democratic Town Committee

West Boylston Democratic Town Committee

Westfield Democratic City Committee

Winchendon Democratic Town Committee

Labor and Working Families

Berkshire Central Labor Council

Greater Boston Labor Council

Greater Southeastern Labor Council

Hampshire Franklin Central Labor Council

Norfolk County Central Labor Council

North Shore Labor Council

Pioneer Valley AFL-CIO

Plymouth/Bristol Central Labor Council

Worcester Community Labor Coalition

AFSCME Local 944

AFSCME Local 1526

American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts (AFT Mass)

AFT Connecticut Executive Committee

Boston Metro Area Local 100, American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO

Boston Teachers Union

Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Union Local 3

HPAE, New Jersey

HPAE, Local 5118

IATSE Local 11

IBEW 103

IBEW 104

IBEW Local 2222

IBEW 2321

Insulators Local 6

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) Local 264

International Union of Operating Engineers Local 877

Ironworkers Local 7

Local 4 Operating Engineers

Massachusetts AFL-CIO

Massachusetts Democratic Party

Massachusetts State Council of Machinists

Massachusetts Teachers Association

Metro Boston Building Trades

National Union of Public and General Employees

New England Regional Council of Carpenters

Painters and Allied Trades DC 35

Pipefitters Local 537

Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts

Roofers & Waterproofers Union Local 33

SEIU Local 888

SEIU/NAGE

Teamsters Local 25

Teamsters Local 42

Teamsters Local 170

Teamsters Local 122

UAW Local 2322 & 2324

UAW Region 9 Massachusetts

UNITE HERE, New England Joint Board

UNITE HERE, Local 26

United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1445 & 1459

United Steel Workers Local 7912 & 9432

Utility Workers Union of America Local 369

There are some important points to note in this long list. First, under Nurses Nationwide many are from Canada where there is universal healthcare and where the wait times are long and the care is so good that Canadians come to the U.S. for health services when they can afford it. Other nurses associations are from out of state. Under Community Groups you see the words “social justice,” “socialist,” “progressive,” and “revolution.” Even the group “Resist the Pipeline.” Does anybody believe these are mainstream groups worried about safe patient care? You have got to be kidding.

Also note the long list of Democratic town committees. No Republican town committees? If Question 1 is such a good idea, you would think maybe one – one lonely Republican town committee – might support it? But no, there are none.

And the last list of Labor and Working Families is mostly a list of unions, teachers, carpenters, steelworkers, machinists, pipefitters, bricklayers and so forth. Are all these unions concerned about safe patient care?

Have you figured it out yet? Question 1 is not about safe patient health. It’s all about jobs, jobs and more jobs. That’s why labor unions and the Democratic Party are behind this ballot measure.

But all these nurses that will have to be hired to increase staffing levels will be costly. In April the Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association, opponents to Question 1, commissioned an independent study on the cost, and the report (http://tinyurl.com/ybr6gd6k) concluded that approval of this initiative could cost the healthcare system $1.31 billion the first year and $900 million/year thereafter.

On October 3rd, the Massachusetts Health Policy Commission (MHPC) released its own report (http://tinyurl.com/ybkgkd74) on Question 1 and concluded that if passed the provisions would cost $676 to $949 million/year. MHPC also looked at California’s government-mandated patient to nurse ratio law which was passed in 1999, and concluded that although California had to significantly increase nurse staffing, there was “no systemic improvement in patient outcomes.”

Proponents of Question 1, of course, had their own study (http://tinyurl.com/yb7ap6vy) done by a professor at the Boston College School of Nursing and she came up with a figure of $47 million for implementation.

Whatever the numbers are, and it looks like they will be closer to the $900 million mark than the $47 million, someone will have to pay for it if Question 1 passes. And first in line is the hospital that has to hire the extra nurses. That cost will then be passed on to the patients, insurance companies and government agencies like MassHealth, Medicare and so forth. If any of these resist the higher costs, that will put pressure on the hospitals and medical centers to change behavior such as cutting back on services or eliminating entire departments. Some already on the edge of breaking even may even be forced to shut down. This is not a threat but a reality.

Back to California for a minute. California was the first and is the only state to pass comprehensive government-mandated patient-to-nurse staffing limits. It is also used as a benchmark by proponents for the Massachusetts ballot initiative. Here is a comparison of the two plans:

From Ballotpedia

It’s a little hard to sort out and compare Question 1 to California, but if you look closely you will see that the Massachusetts’ initiative is even more stringent than the California law and would require even more nurses. For example, labor and delivery is two patients per nurse in California but is only one patient per nurse in Massachusetts.

Think jobs and money.

So how did this whole Question 1 thing get started?

Late in the fall of 2017 the Committee to Ensure Safe Patient Care submitted the Question 1 language along with 75,542 certified signatures to Secretary of State Bill Galvin’s office.

You remember seeing hundreds of nurses gathering signatures out in front of supermarkets and post offices, don’t you? You don’t? Well, maybe that’s because the nurses weren’t out collecting signatures. The Committee to Ensure Safe Patient Care contracted with JEF Associates to collect the signatures and paid them handsomely – $570,518. That’s $7.55 per signature of Nurses Association money.

In contrast, Question 2 on the ballot, about a commission to recommend overturning a Supreme Court decision, paid only $2.03 per signature.

When you have lots of money, money is no object to getting what you want.

So, what is the opposition to Question 1?

The Coalition to Protect Patient Safety was formed to oppose the patient-to-nurse government mandate. It has raised $13.35 million as of October 1st, $12.68 million provided by the Massachusetts Health & Hospital Association, or 94.97%. The remaining donors were mostly Massachusetts hospitals and medical centers, but the Organization of Nurse Leaders donated $44,059 to the effort. The donor hospitals ranged from the well-known Boston medical institutions to the small, rural medical centers, and even the religious hospitals. In-kind expenditures, mostly from hospitals, have added another million dollars to the effort to defeat Question 1.

So, who else opposes Question 1? Here is a list of groups and organizations supporting the opposition:

Note the types of organizations listed. We have physicians, nurses, surgeons, pharmacists, teaching hospitals, senior care, home care, and many chambers of commerce. The Massachusetts Medical Society and the Harvard Medical Faculty Physicians oppose Question 1.

Every Massachusetts hospital – that is EVERY Massachusetts hospital opposes Question 1. You might think that if Question 1 was so good for patient care, maybe one – just one – hospital in the state might back it? But no, proponents couldn’t get one hospital on board.

And look at the quality and professionalism of the organizations. There are no long lists of political town committees. There are no social justice groups or activists looking for power and glory. Nobody trying to stop a pipeline in this group.

Let’s wrap this whole discussion up with a question. Compare all the supporters in favor of Question 1 to all the supporters opposed to Question 1.

Which group do you think better represents what’s in our best interest for the Massachusetts healthcare system? Then you will know how to vote on November 6th.

For more information on the Yes On 1 ballot committee, see https://safepatientlimits.org/who-we-are/. For the No On 1 ballot committee, see https://www.protectpatientsafety.com/. ♦

Related Articles

By Ted Tripp Political Reporter We have issued notices in the past about House bill H.2985, which attempts to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. The Joint Committee on Transportation was supposed to report out on the bill by May 16, but nothing has happened. We believe your phone calls and e-mails against the bill Read More…

Tank the Olympic Tax Committee held a “Bacon Hill Night of Crime” at the Ever-So-Humble Pie Company. by Ted Tripp Political Reporter The first thing you notice when you walk into Andrea Taber’s Ever So Humble Pie Company is the flags and patriotic banners hanging from the ceiling. There are American flags, colonial flags, Minutemen Read More…

by Ted Tripp Sr. Political Reporter Last month, Massachusetts’ three biggest health insurers reported losses of $201 million for the first six months of 2016, blaming ObamaCare and the cost of prescription drugs. The state’s largest insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, had a loss of $98.3 million for the first half of Read More…

2 Replies to “Ballot Question 1: Government Mandated Nurse Staffing at Hospitals All About Money, Jobs and Power”

Having read this I believed it was extremely informative. I
appreciate you spending some time and effort to
put this informative article together. I once again find myself
spending way too much time both reading and posting comments.
But so what, it was still worth it!

Thank God this mandate did not pass or Massachusetts would be one step closer to Socialism with Government controlled Nurses. Immediately the State would have hired more cronies to regulate, causing more government jobs for favors or friends. Bigger government just what we don’t need.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment

Name *

Email *

Website

THE BOSTON BROADSIDE IS AN OFFICIAL RECRUITER FOR THE NRA – JOIN AMERICA’S OLDEST CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION TODAY – ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP: $10! FULL MEMBERSHIP: $30 (WITH MAGAZINE). WE WANT TO RECRUIT 100 MEMBERS THIS MONTH.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY TO OUR PRINTED EDITION!

WE POST A FEW ARTICLES HERE, but subscribe to read all the articles, or give a gift subscription to ANYONE!

As the only mass-distributed, non-liberal newspaper in New England, we strive to give voice to the opinions and actions of those who typically get ignored or marginalized by the liberal press.

JOIN OUR E-MAIL LIST

Join Our Weekly (or more frequent) E-mail List

Join our e-mail list.
We send out from 1 to 3 e-mails each week, just to update you with events and news about The Boston Broadside. This includes alerts to 'between-printed-issues' special columns, events, and info, as well as e-mails regarding our supporter/subscription campaign, and special events.

Email *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from The Boston Broadside - The People's Paper. (You can unsubscribe anytime. Just click the unsubscribe list at the bottom of any e-mail.)

Constant Contact Use.

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact